Talk:United States military insignia
Implied existence I plan to add the sleeve stripe for Ensign since the existence is implied by the established sleeve stripe patterns of Lieutenant and Commander. See my discussion on the US military talk page about this. -FleetCaptain 17:28, 12 September 2007 (UTC) :This "Implied existence theroy" appears to have warrant over on the Starfleet ranks article in that higher Admiral insignia, which have never been seen on screen, on shown in the rank tables. On that token, one and two star generals seem to be implied by the visual sighting of three and four star generals. Like wise, a one stripe ensign rank seems itself implied by the two and three stripes seen in . Second Lieutenant would be pushing it, but by that logic, I think these ranks should be added to the article. -FleetCaptain 20:37, 12 September 2007 (UTC) Extra General Ranks I did some research and as far as I can tell, the American ranks of Brigadier and Major General never appear in Star Trek. They were added to the chart on this article and even the editor who put them in acknolwedged there was no citation available for the inclusion. I have therefore removed the following: -FleetCaptain 18:38, 31 August 2007 (UTC) :Just to clarify, I put them back in based on the "Implied Ranks" theroy which I explained above. -FleetCaptain 21:44, 12 September 2007 (UTC) Second Lieutenant An interesting followup to this after I am starting to think that Second Lieutenant has also never actually been seen in an episode. However...if by the very nature of the insignia itself (for General and First Lieutenant) it can be naturally reasoned that there are indeed 2 stars and 1 star and a gold bar below the silver, could they then be included in the insignia table so as to include all ranks (at least in the office corps) for the U.S. military. I take this from the reasonsing of Starfleet ranks where the upper Admrial sleeve insignias were deduced from lower ones and allowed to stay in the table. Thoughts and opinions are needed. Suggestions? -FleetCaptain 16:25, 10 September 2007 (UTC) :I think that the following insignia should all be deleted: :*major general stars :*brigadier general star :*ensign stripe :*second lieutenant bar :They didn't appear on Star Trek and have no relevance. -- Captain MKB 20:14, 12 September 2007 (UTC) Who speedily deleted them? That was kind of rude I think as it should have been discussed...the fact that three and four stars are seen implies by its very nature that one and two stars exist. And, I point out that non-seen rank insignia are referenced as existing on Starfleet ranks. What allows them to stay in place while these must be deleted? -FleetCaptain 20:18, 12 September 2007 (UTC) :Rude how? I created those images and it is perfectly within a users rights to delete or request deletion for their own self-created images. I initially added them in the hope that citation was found, and none has been, therefore the images are not useful. I have systematically deleted other unseen Starfleet insignia over the years as well -- more might be due to be removed, you are right. -- Captain MKB 20:23, 12 September 2007 (UTC) I think it should have been discussed espeically since I took the time to expand the page and start the discussion. But, this is probably just a misunderstanding; I dont think you came here to hurt the article. I've asked for other opinions and a possible undelete if warranted. -FleetCaptain 20:32, 12 September 2007 (UTC) ::Can we contain the discussion to just one talk page, please? I'm going to answer here, for the moment, and then merge the discussions together later. As I see it, the situation is as follows: Mike originally uploaded these images while marking them as "public domain". As of that moment, any claims of "personal work" were irrelevant. Of course Mike may suggest them for deletion (and, in my personal opinion, he would be right to do so, if those specific ranks haven't been seen) - but he should do that following the correct procedure, not by simply deleting them. As there has been a request for undeletion, and the proper procedure had not been followed, I'm undeleting. Feel free to suggest them for proper deletion then. -- Cid Highwind 20:48, 12 September 2007 (UTC) :Cid, I do not feel these images are appropriate and will not be re-uploading them. "Any material (image, audio file, et al.) that has been uploaded and stored on Memory Alpha that is not directly related to an article or the project." from the Speedy deletion criteria. :Fleet Captain did in fact remove the images from the article, orphaning them, but then flip flopped and added them back in shortly before deletion -- and I wasn't aware of him changing his mind. Also, they have been uncited and marked as such for weeks. I uploaded them intending to delete them if no citation exists, none was found, so I did. :Since these are public domain, and available on Memory Beta, it will not be hard for any user to replace them, but I wouldn't feel appropriate doing so. :I still maintain that, if a user uploads a self-made image, they still have the right to request its deletion -- and I muddied the waters a little by requesting of myself. -- Captain MKB 21:38, 12 September 2007 (UTC) ::Regarding the quote from "speedy deletion criteria", the spirit (if not the word) of that rule has always been to allow speedy deletion of "lookatmycoolstarship.gif" or "My_Grandmas_House.PNG". If we have images showing one and four stars, then images showing two or three stars can't be that unrelated, even if it turns out in the end that they are unnecessary for whatever reasons. ::Regarding the deletion request for self-uploaded images, I think what you have in mind is our agreement to delete without big discussion if a user accidentally uploads an image and immediately requests its deletion? -- Cid Highwind 21:53, 12 September 2007 (UTC) Seen People, Unseen Ranks In editing the insignia page to put wikipedia links on BG and MG, I bituced the note to leave out Pershing since he was never mentioned. What about Eisenhower, whose reference was as POTUS, but was mentioned and did hold the rank?--Ten-pint 19:16, December 13, 2010 (UTC)